Daisy 901 or 880?

[Trigg603]

I'm going to buy a 901 or 880 today, and want to know which one is more powerful, accurate ( if there is a difference ), and durable.  I plan on using this guns for pest birds, close range tree rats, and general plinking.

Any advice / opinions are greatly appreciated!

[Bryan Heimann]

As far as I know, the 901 and 880 are the same internally.  The 901 is supposed to be a bit more robust, and that is why it costs a little bit more.  I have not personally used the 901, but I would give it a try.  Today's new 880's are pretty flimsy, and the 901's i have handled in stores seem a little more durable.

[DavidS]

To the best of my knowledge the 901 and Daisy 880 are equal in power, accuracy, and identical in internal design.   

So if money is not an issue, the only question would be which styling do you prefer.

[stonykill]

the 901 is synthetic where the 880 is plain old plastic. The 901 I am told has multiple straw barrel stabilizers in it as well to improve out of the box accuracy. If I were to only purchase one of them and NOT the other, and money was not an object I would get the 901. Not that there is a huge price difference, but an 880 is a less than $50 AG. And is a darn good one for the price.

[DavidS]

@stonykill:
Thank you for that piece of information.  I did not know about the barrel stabilizers in the 901.   Now I may get a Daisy 901 for my next gun (still debating what to get myself).

[Trigg603]

I got the 901 and I like it.  I bought a little BSA 4x32 to put on it.  The sound of the 901 firing is different than my Crosman 2100, and I believe that the 901 puts the pellets out a bit faster.

One thing, the stock on the 901 is kinda loose.  Anyone know how to tighten it?

[DavidS]

I got the 901 and I like it.  I bought a little BSA 4x32 to put on it.  The sound of the 901 firing is different than my Crosman 2100, and I believe that the 901 puts the pellets out a bit faster.

One thing, the stock on the 901 is kinda loose.  Anyone know how to tighten it?

I think that there are 3 screws on each side just like with the Daisy 880.  These will be one large screw and 2 smaller screws at the rear of the receiver.   These hold the stock in place, do not over tighten.

[stonykill]

@stonykill:
Thank you for that piece of information.  I did not know about the barrel stabilizers in the 901.   Now I may get a Daisy 901 for my next gun (still debating what to get myself).

 I want one myself, once I finish all of the P17 builds in my head 

   I was given this info by a member on this forum. Forget his name.... I'm bad with names...good with numbers 

[Recoil spring]

I have a 2 year old Daisy 901 that I have been happy with, it is actually more powerful than my Crosman 2100, even though Crosman says it is stronger, what bunk!  The 901 is well balanced, accurate, and seems to be holding up well, I use it regularly.  The looseness in the stock is only noticeable if you really hold your hand on it and wiggle it with muscle.

Was thinking of getting an 880 but so far my 901 fills the bill, the You Tube videos show it to be easy to tear down for maintenance/overhaul.  I got a schematic of its internals from Daisy, for when the time comes to rebuild it, whenever that happens as I have only had one air gun had a blown seal and it was on a Benjamin.  Still I am curious about an 880 for variety.

The pumping effort on the 901 is very easy, at first I thought the gun was broken it was that easy.  This is what I would get a kid over the Crosman.   

[Trigg603]

   Recoil, I've had the same exact experience with my 901 so far.  The stock does flex a bit when pumping and although it is annoying, I haven't found a solution.  My 901 is definitely more powerful than my 2100.  As far as pumping the gun, I actually thought my 901 was broken because if I didn't cock the gun before I started pumping, the air would come out of the barrel.  I actually returned the first gun because of this issue.  I should probably start reading the manual BEFORE trying to operate an airgun.

[Bryan Heimann]

The crosman 2100 of old probably was stronger, or on par at a minimum.  They haven't updated those stats since production went downhill, lol.  Or if they did, they probabky inflated the numbers with pellets made of foam, or god knows what else.

[DavidS]

I would expect the Daisy 901 to be significantly more powerful than the Crosman 2100, simply because every Daisy 880 that I have shot is much more powerful than ANY Crosman 2100 that I have EVER used, and the Dasiy 880 and 901 share the same exact power plant.

[K.O.]

I Know that thru the 70s-80s and early 90s the 2100 was the more powerful but the 880 was more popular in Nevada because of the way they looked.

The 2100b does not have the build quality it once had but if you put a little work in they can measure up to the older 2100s

I feel I will be able to get 18- 20 fpe from the 2100 powerplant.

I feel the 880 powerplant will top out at about 15.

The 880 is a much better rifle for smaller folk and kids for sure because of pump effort.

I think the 2100 for me is the better choice  6'3" and 250 lbs.   

Many of the Current Daisy 880s get low 600s to 700 fps with 7.9g pellets just like the 2100 from what I have seen.

I like the  Daisy 880 but being a touch large the 2100 suits me better...

David I just have to strongly disagree with your assessment...

It is not a Daisy vs Crosman thing for me...   I like the modular builds I do I just wish the had the potential  of a custom pump tube...

Like I said power wise stock it is a toss up and in my opinion has been that way since the 90's...

[DavidS]

I Know that thru the 70s-80s and early 90s the 2100 was the more powerful but the 880 was more popular in Nevada because of the way they looked.

The 2100b does not have the build quality it once had but if you put a little work in they can measure up to the older 2100s

I feel I will be able to get 18- 20 fpe from the 2100 powerplant.

We have all had our own experience and yours is fair.    I do agree that if you put the work into it the 2100 Power plant is able to produce 20FPE no problem.  Though interestingly enough do to the different style valve so is the 66 power plant.

I feel the 880 powerplant will top out at about 15.

The 880 is a much better rifle for smaller folk and kids for sure because of pump effort.

I think it would be possible to get the 880/901 power plant up above 20FPE if one were to put the work into it.  Though with the Daisy 880 power plant it would be a question of a longer pump tube and modified linkage, and with the Crosman 2100 powerplant it is much more work .   Though this is just my opinion.

Being chair bound I do appreciate the lower pumping effort of the Daisy guns.

I think the 2100 for me is the better choice  6'3" and 250 lbs.   

I could understand that.   I am 5'3" so that likely does make a difference.

Many of the Current Daisy 880s get low 600s to 700 fps with 7.9g pellets just like the 2100 from what I have seen.

I guess I have been lucky with the Daisy 880's I have gotten.    I do disassemble them and make sure that the pump tube is seated forward far enough with out shimming when I tape the barrel, this may be part of my good luck with these guns.

I like the  Daisy 880 but being a touch large the 2100 suits me better...

David I just have to strongly disagree with your assessment...

It is not a Daisy vs Crosman thing for me...   I like the modular builds I do I just wish the had the potential  of a custom pump tube...

I have to agree, I like the modular builds with both the Crosman guns and the Daisy guns.   It is nice that both companies make there guns modular.

And I do like the Crosman guns.

Like I said power wise stock it is a toss up and in my opinion has been that way since the 90's...

We have each had different experiences on that issue.   I will gladly respect your experience.

[Trigg603]

My 901 is appreciably more powerful than my 2100.  I am 6'2" and around 260, and while I agree the 2100 is a larger framed gun, I do find with the 901 comfortable to shoulder and shoot.  The sights are MUCH better on the 901 than the 2100.  The front sight on my 2100 is too wide for precise shooting, while the 901's front sight is much thinner.  They are both fiberoptic, and I do like that.

I will say that the 2100 feels much more solid than the 901.  I don't have any parts on my 2100 that really flex, but I can feel the stock move / flex slightly when pumping the 901.  If anyone knows how to rectify this issue on the 901, please advise!!!  I will probably start a new thread to see if anyone has a solution.

[DavidS]

@Trigg603:
I hold my pumpers by the receiver when pumping, not the stock.    I use small tube scopes so that I can get my fingers around the scope to grab the receiver with out disturbing the scope.

Hope that this helps.

[Recoil spring]

Pellet Hunter .22...I enjoyed a good chuckle on your comments regarding the use of old data with Crosman, the makers of airguns love to use strange pellets to boost their specifications.   Right now I am very disappointed with Crosman, I am considering another of their Co2 2240 pattern pistols, but in a different configuration from my regular model of 2240 pistol.  Crosman has been coming out with new guns but I don't plan to buy any of them, wish Daisy would offer as nice a variety too.

[Bryan Heimann]

Recoil Spring, it's funny because it's true. As a boy, in my home town it was Crosman vs. Daisy, and I grew up a huge fan of Crosman.  It wasn't until one of my neighbors got a Daisy 880 that I began to appreciate Daisy a little but more.  Even in it's current plastic configuration, no doubt the 880 is a good little gun.  I only with it was still offered with a metal receiver.  No doubt it is a super handy little gun to tote in it's current plastic form.  Definitely meets all my criteria to be a truck gun - especially the criteria for price.  Easily the most bang for your buck under $50.

[boomer92266]

I got the 901 and I like it.  I bought a little BSA 4x32 to put on it.  The sound of the 901 firing is different than my Crosman 2100, and I believe that the 901 puts the pellets out a bit faster.

One thing, the stock on the 901 is kinda loose.  Anyone know how to tighten it?

i have a 901, i called daisy and ordered a stock and right receiver and screws. seems the new guns are stock with separate left-right receiver while the older ones had the left receiver molded with the stock. no wobble on the older models, call daisy order the stock, right receiver, and screw set. i forgot what i paid but it was less than $15 shipping included. now i haven't put it on yet, figured i'd wait till something broke. but if it does i'm ready.

[boomer92266]

also i can confirm that the 901 does have barrel supports as i had daisy send me a diagram and the supports are there. the 901 is only around $25 more than an 880, the better stock and barrel supports and the better front sight is worth it to me.